Ah he is indeed refering to Winrar so I got that right, good.Jace Tsunami wrote:a winrar file.....
Not many people have it. Agreed. But as I said, it is easy enough to get.Jace Tsunami wrote:Common dude, not many people have that program, and seeing as how you appearently do, you didn't have to make a .rar file, winrar will also compress anything into a .zip file.
Refering to the above reason alone, i.e., not many people have it, he didn't install it. However, he has installed it before, but found it to be tedious, which means he found the program to be boring, though no reasons are given as to why this is so. Ah, I see my mistake, he was not bored by the download but rather the program itself.Jace Tsunami wrote:I didn't download it for that reason alone under the fact I've seen it before, because I don't feel like installing another tedious program.
This is a possibility, but I still doubt many people will care all that much.Jace Tsunami wrote:You'll up downloads if you convert that file to a .zip
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now then, you came back and grouch at me that I didn't read your message. After breaking it down I indeed came back with a slightly different meaning, but the reasons for your argument were still unclear.
You found the program tedious, tedious means boring, which is a rather vague description of an decompression tool. You did not bother to state that you did not want a program on your computer that you felt made it run slower. If you had simply said that instead of limiting your argument the the use of one word: tedious, I probably would have nodded and allowed you to have your reasons for not liking the downloads being available as RAR files. Your rebuttal, as hostile as it comes across, makes more sense, and does a better job of describing your opinion on winrar as a compression/uncompression tool. And now that you've taken some time to clarify your position I won't argue with it, it makes sense from your perspective and I'll leave it at that.